State reps looking to usurp PGC, PFBC authority should be red flag for Pa. sportsmen

August 27, 2013|Gary Blockus

State Rep. Jeff Pyle, R-Armstrong, and state Sen. Joe Scarnati, R-Jefferson, have fired the first salvo, and for sportsmen and sportswomen, it should be "the shot heard 'round the Commonwealth."

Much as the NRA likes to preach that the federal government wants to take away guns, the view from this tree stand is that the state government wants to take away your forest and wildlife habitat.

While the likelihood of the feds ever actually passing any legislation to take away the guns of law-abiding citizens is slim to none, the chances of the state legislature taking control of the Pennsylvania Game Commission and Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission decision-making are increasing each day.

Already, due to political pressure and appointments, Gov. Tom Corbett's pro-drilling Marcellus Shale forces have a stronghold in the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources leadership, opening up significant portions of state forest to speculative drilling, deforestation and proven groundwater pollution.

Now, Pyle and Scarnati — according to Monday's front page article in The Morning Call — want the endangered species laws to fall under legislative oversight, producing a time-consuming process that will delay response by PGC and PFBC to protect certain species and habitat.

Such decisions would fall under the purview of the Independent Regulatory Review Committee (IRRC), but the problem with something like IRRC taking control over anything related to wildlife, fish, water or the environment lies in its response time and reliance on the legislative branch for final approvals, which could delay for up to two years things that need to be done immediately.

Last fall, for example, the first-ever Pennsylvania cases of chronic wasting disease (CWD) were verified in farm-raised deer in the central part of the Commonwealth. Within days, outgoing Pennsylvania Game Commission Executive Director Carl G. Roe issued an executive order listing more than 600 square miles of the state as a disease management area (DMA).

All deer harvested in that area were required to be taken to either a special checkpoint or processing agent to check for CWD. Had the move been subject to IRRC measures, the methodology to prescribe a DMA could still be sitting within the state House or Senate committees while the disease spreads. Since the executive order was decreed last fall, a second DMA has been established.

The proposed legislative oversight would more narrowly define the habitat range of suspected endangered species, theoretically opening up more public land for development. In the case of the Corbett administration, that translates to more Marcellus Shale exploration.

In stripping those decisions from the PGC and PFBC, Drew Crompton, Scarnati's chief of staff, told The Morning Call that, "We want to be able to say here is the science. It's posted. It's available to reporters, developers, legislators and therefore there's a rational basis this area should be protected for frogs, fish, trout, whatever."

One would think that if Scarnati were truly concerned with the science of the decisions, his chief of staff would be able to talk about the southern leopard frog, or New Jersey chorus frog, frogs that are on Pennsylvania's list of endangered reptiles or amphibians, or even use the term endangered amphibians.

At least for me, when I need facts from the PGC or PFBC, as I did last December regarding the reclassification of the Saw Mill Run and its effect on reopening Firefly Hatchery (the old Kriss Pines Trout Hatchery near Lehighton) I received more than enough scientific information and had unfettered access to a wide variety of specialists on PFBC staff.

This proposal comes a week after the game commission announced it will begin the process of delisting bald eagles from the threatened species list. They will still be on the protected list, as well as the federally protected list.

Delisting the bald eagle isn't something that's done overnight. Four criteria must be met for five consecutive years, and all but one have occurred for at least the last five years. Putting the decision under IRRC domain would unnecessarily lengthen the process and subject it to a political process.

It would also enable legislators to take credit and claim "they" made the decision, something we see every spring when, after the PFBC releases its trout stocking schedule, state senators and representatives issue their own releases that "they" are releasing the state stocking schedule.

Some also fear that the move to introduce the IRRC and political process to PGC, PFBC and DCNR is the precursor to merging the agencies as a cost-cutting move, when in reality it would strip the agencies of the power to react in a timely manner.